Arrest Larry Silverstein for mass murder... check out his answer to Luke Rokowski

reply to post by sKiTzo247

A) Mr. Silverstein bought the properties and immediately took out a record insurance policy on the entire complex>
B) The buildings were so huge they couldn't keep the place completely rented. They were losing money.
C) The previous owners had been trying to get permits to demolish the buildings and were continuously denied the permits because there was asbestos in the building that would be released into the air if they were to be demolished. So the buildings were in a sense condemned. So we conclude that there is a strong desire to demolish the buildings by the owner(s), Larry Silverstein and partners.
D) It has been demonstrated to an extremely high degree that fire did not or could not bring these buildings down and that the manner in which they were destroyed could only have been a "controlled demolition".
E) Al Qaida would not have been able to have access to these buildings to place the charges required for such a demolition in the months prior to 911.
F) Larry Silverstein and Co. are the only ones who could have had this access to place the charges.
G) Silverstein, knowing that there was a high probabilityof the eminent attack, had the charges placed in the buildings ready to go off if such an attack was to take place OR more likely he had preknowledge of the event to begin with.
H) At the cost of a couple of thousand lives, he gained BILLIONS of dollars....

AND YOU ARE GOING TO BELIEVE OR EVEN CARE ABOUT WHAT HE SAID ABOUT WHAT HIS WIFE SAID ABOUT A DOCTOR APPOINTMENT??? Dude, WAKE UP!!

WHEN WILL CONSPIRACY AND MASS MURDER CHARGES BE BROUGHT AGAINST THIS WEASEL???????!!!!!!!!!! There were more resources exhausted investigating Clinton getting a blowjob than this.

You make a nice parrot - repeating every piece of idiotic nonsense....

Insurance - Silverstein actually tried to buy LESS insurance on the WTC
Wanted to buy 1.5 billion on each building. It was the lenders putting up
the money for the purchase who insisted on more - wanted 7 billion for
each tower, Silverstein and them compromised on 3.5 billion per building

The previous source also mentions that Silverstein originally wanted to only buy 1.5 billion dollars in coverage, and eventually went with 3.5 billion dollars, which was still far less than the lenders suggested- in short, Silverstein was trying to purchase the bare minimum coverage. Logic dictates that if Silverstein had foreknowledge of the 9-11 attacks, as conspiracy theorists claim, he would have purchased the maximum coverage.

As for the claim that Silverstein properties made substantial profit as a result of the 9-11 collapse, that is a total lie and the evidence is here. The insurance payout won’t reach anywhere near $7.1 billion. Furthermore, at the moment the payments are only going to be 4.6 billion dollars and that money is going to rebuild the WTC complex, which will cost about 6.3 billion. In addition, Silverstein still has to pay the rent, which is $120 million per year to keep the right to rebuild. Hmm, let’s see, so the cost of rebuilding is MORE than the insurance payout? Seems to me that’s a loss, not a profit. Members of the 9-11 “Truth” Movement may want to brush up on their math.

As for vacancy - both towers were almost full with 98% occupancy, refer
to earlier quote for fact that Silverstein is still responsible for the rent
with no buildings. Also shows that he received LESS than replacement
value in insurance

As Real Estate Director, a position Mrs. Nanninga has held since 1996, the occupancy rate at the trade center has risen from 78 percent to a healthy 98 percent, retail soared in the trade center's mall, and available office space in the Newark Legal Center has nearly been filled.

Asbestos -only North Tower contained asbestos and then only on lower floors. The asbestos was removed or encapsulated to prevent it from
being released. When the towers collapsed all that asbestos was released

Anticipating a ban (on the use of asbestos in construction in NY), the builders stopped using the materials by the time they reached the 40th floor of the north tower, the first one to go up…" According to a spokesman for the Port Authority "more than half of the original, asbestos-containing material was later replaced."

On April 13, 1970, New York City issued restrictions on the application of sprayed thermal insulation containing asbestos. The use of BLAZE-SHIELD Type D was discontinued in 1970 at the 38th floor of WTC 1. The asbestos-containing material was subsequently encapsulated with a sprayed material that provided a hard coating. A green dye was added to the encapsulating material so that the asbestos containing SFRM could be identified.

As for Larry Silverstein and alleged "controlled demolition"

Dont envsion a man in his 70's crawling through the buildings planting
explosives....


Any more dumb statements,,,,

reply to post by thedman


If Silverstein was going to lose money on this deal he would simply declare bankruptcy. I'm sure that he created a seperate company for the WTC. He probably had a seperate company for each building. A simple bankruptcy filing allows him to simply walk away, personal and other business assets in tact.

Since he's not walking, he is making money. Most likely a ton of it. I have no pity for Mr. Larry "pull-it" Silverstein.

reply to post by thedman


You are a tad on the ignorant side...perhaps you really believe that Larry would place the charges himself crawling through the building! I have more "dumb statements" > Silverstein Properties became the primary owner of the WTC Twin Towers less than two months before 9/11/01 (Westfield Malls was Silverstein Properties' minority-partner). Buying from the New York Port Authority, Silverstein Properties invested only $15 million toward a total purchase-price of $3.2 billion for a 99-year lease on holdings worth an estimated $8 billion. The low-rise office buildings WTC 4, 5, and 6, and 400,000 square feet of retail space were included with the Twin Towers in this deal. Silverstein Properties immediately took out extensive insurance policies on its new holdings.

One clause in Silverstein Properties' insurance policies for the new WTC holdings soon proved instrumental. Quoting the British Financial Times of September 14, 2001, the American Reporter wrote that ‘ the lease has an all-important escape clause: If the buildings are struck by “an act of terrorism”, the new owners' obligations under the lease are void. As a result, the new owners are not required to make any payments under their lease, but they will be able to collect on the loss of the buildings that collapsed or were otherwise destroyed and damaged in the attacks. Silverstein Properties is still contesting the amount of pay-out due for destruction of the Twin Towers—$3.55 billion for one ‘occurrence’ or $7.1 billion for two ‘occurrences’. The “terrorism” clause in his lease has given Larry Silverstein leverage in negotiating his new deal for the site.

Let's hear some more of YOUR dumb statements...because you take the cake! I would love to hear your sans Larry Silverstein version of what happened but until then, we can only go with what makes the most sense because of where the hard evidence takes us, not fantasy just because you don't want to believe that lucky larry would neeevver do something like that. Whoever did crawl through the buildings could not have done so without Larry's knowledge of it. So his involvement, as little or as much as it was, is undeniable. If you continue to be ignorant of all the information supporting this, then you're really not worth trying to convince anyway..